-
Actegy Ltd
A TV ad for ‘Revitive Circulation Booster’, a Neuromuscular electrical stimulation device, claiming it could reduce swelling did not make clear this was only in relation to healthy people and was a temporary result. It also made misleading claims the device could improve walking distance and duration for th...
-
Navi Organics Ltd
A website made unsubstantiated efficacy claims and discouraged essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought.
-
Insulet International Limited t/a Omnipod
A video on demand ad failed to present qualifying text clearly.
-
Oakever Games PTE Ltd
Two in-game ads made medical claims for an unregistered device which didn’t hold the relevant compliance labels and made unsubstantiated claims that an app could improve memory and sleep.
-
Person(s) unknown t/a Sereni
A paid-for Meta ad made medical claims for a product which didn’t have the relevant compliance labels.
-
Prime Star Shop Ltd t/a Branshaws
A press ad made medical claims for an unlicenced product which didn’t hold the relevant compliance labels.
-
Shop TJC Ltd t/a The Jewellery Channel
A teleshopping ad promoted a product that was a medical treatment for humans and also made medical claims for an unlicensed device.
-
Mayborn (UK) Ltd t/a Tommee Tippee
A paid-for Instagram ad for a device for removing air particles from milk made unsubstantiated efficacy claims for treating colic and its symptoms.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following a formal investigation, the advertising rules apply and where we draw the line in judging whether an ad has broken the rules. We also publish a list of companies and organisations which agree to amend or withdraw their ad without being subject to a formal ruling.
Rulings (8)